Obama’s gravitas man confuses military terms

posted at 7:36 am on August 28, 2008 by Ed Morrissey

Barack Obama added Joe Biden to the ticket to give him some much-needed gravitas on foreign policy and military affairs. Biden gave an indication of how successful this might be by managing to confuse the termsbattalion and brigade in his acceptance speech at the convention last night. Most amusingly, it came while Biden attempted to argue that it was John McCain who was militarily incompetent:

Speaking at the Democratic National Convention about Sen. Barack Obama’s foreign policy judgment, Biden stated that Obama has advocated for two additional battalions in Afghanistan.

In fact, Obama called for two extra brigades – a small verbal slip, but a significant numerical one. A brigade is composed of a varying number of battalions. Biden’s prepared remarks included the correct term.

Well, Biden does bring something different to the ticket; Obama can read a teleprompter.

Even beyond this embarrassing gaffe, Biden goes off the rails with this speech. Afghanistan was actually in better shape three years ago than it was last year. Notice that Biden doesn’t mention Obama’s “judgment” on Afghanistan in 2005 to compare it to McCain’s; he mentions 2007. A series of force reductions by other NATO members, changes in strategy, as well as a really foolish appeasement plan from Pervez Musharraf in 2006, helped allow the Taliban to recover and worsen the situation.

So yes, no one was talking much about Afghanistan in 2005. I commented often about how that conflict had mostly disappeared from the mainstream media, and it was because at that point, the effort had gone well. John McCain made the same comment, and he was right. Both he and Barack Obama were right in 2007, when the situation deteriorated to the point where the NATO command got the boot and new strategies were put it place to use much more aggressive tactics against the Taliban.

As for McCain’s alleged support for a disastrous strategy in Iraq, that’s so untrue as to be outright laughable, almost as bad as Biden’s use of battalions for brigades. McCain started warning of the strategic errors taking place in Iraq in 2005, and pushed for the “surge” for years before it was finally implemented in 2007. Biden’s running mate opposed the surge and claimed it would create even more violence and destabilization, and to this day can’t bring himself to admit that McCain was right and he was wrong. Had Obama been in charge at that point, we would have run away from Iraq and allowed it to collapse into a failed state, and a haven for the terrorists we defeated.

To paraphrase what I posted elsewhere, I don’t see this as a big deal… true – 35 years in the Senate, voting on military maters (hell, at least budgets) should leave Biden a little better prepared than the average lawyer to speak about military units…

Well, Joe Biden actually had a rare bout of honesty truth be told. The reason the optempo is so high is politicians like him have cut the size of the force vis a vis 20 years ago by more than half so what he was meaning to say was:

“our policies have been so effective we can only send Battalions in the place of what once would have been brigades that we have all the flow we’ll ever need for operations, so join me in supporting Barry “don’t be saying me middle name laddie” O’bama so we can make the military 33% even more efficient.”

I caught that last night and joked to my wife that two battalions weren’t going to do much. He messed a lot up in that speech. It was pretty disjointed.

Obama appearing on stage saved what was heading downhill. The real winners from the convention so far are the Clintons (Bill’s speech was amazing). If Obama doesn’t deliver tonight I think there could be some real buyers remorse among the average voters that he needs to win over.

You choose to nitpick over specific wrong words, but not those of your own candidate.

So when McCain makees mistakes with Iran, Iraq, Czech REpublic, the simple layout of the world map, etc etc, it’s just a little mis-speak and no big deal, but when Biden says battalion instead of brigade, it’s an “embarrassing gaffe”.

Maybe in his next speech he’ll talk about you guys and use a term like “double standard hilarity”.

I was just a dumb grunt, but I know the difference between battalion and brigade.

While they are both ‘b’ words that designate a military unit, if the Senator wants to split hairs over strategic decisions, he should probably get his terminology correct if he wants to win the confidence of undecided voters.

Russia/Georgia will seal the election. Iraq will be a blip, though not an insignificant one.

Entelechy on August 28, 2008 at 8:02 AM

Well I for one am not worried. Barry will use his years of successful “community organizing” to put Putin in his place…..quite literally putting Putin in the White House if need be I’d wager. “uh um uh is this REALLY worth fighting over?”

Him being a viable candidate at all with his paucity of resume tellms me one side could not possibly care less for the nation’s future.

To be sure, I don’t care that der Gaffenmeister mixed up those two words. It’s the other pap he spewed that will backfire on him and his new ‘camp’.

Entelechy on August 28, 2008 at 8:04 AM

Exactly. The slip of the tongue is innocent enough and not particularly important to me. The amount of spin and outright BS it was taking to paint Obama as being the better candidate on foreign policy is of much greater concern.

McCain said on Letterman that he and his wife are good friends with Biden and wife, and get together socially, even though they disagree politically on much.

How hypocritical does that make Joey, having lauded McCain for president from the left, or from the right, already, repeatedly. I’d hate to have a friend like that. Wait, I never would be in that situation.

Drywall can you tell me precisely which of the 58 states led the “vote by proclamation” for your Messiah last evening undoing 160 years of tradition?
sven10077 on August 28, 2008 at 7:54 AM
—————

Bla bla bla acclamation bla bla bla who cares whatever.

Biden looks stupid for mixing the terms up. I’m the only one around here who holds both candidates accountable for unacceptable verbal fu*k ups. Biden should have known better and should have his sh*t together.

As for you, you have zero objectivity. But that’s okay – if you did it would make the kool aid not taste as good.

How hypocritical does that make Joey, having lauded McCain for president from the left, or from the right, already, repeatedly. I’d hate to have a friend like that. Wait, I never would be in that situation.

Entelechy on August 28, 2008 at 8:19 AM

Both Biden and Kerry wanted McCain as Kerry’s running mate. But that was so last election.

SEN. CLINTON: — in the spring. We need more troops in Afghanistan. And today Senator Bayh and I have sent a letter to Secretary Gates saying that we need two additional infantry battalions in the south of Afghanistan —

McCain started warning of the strategic errors taking place in Iraq in 2005, and pushed for the “surge” for years before it was finally implemented in 2007.

He did? Care to provide some quotes, Ed? The only thing I recall of McCain was the same cry of the left: “more troops, more troops, more troops”. “More troops” was not the “surge”. The “surge” was about COIN strategy, which happened to require “more troops” in order to implement it. But “more troops” for the sake of “more troops” doing the same bad strategy as the previous troops was *not* the answer. I wish McCain supporters would stop saying that McCain was calling for the “surge” strategy. He wasn’t. He called for the same thing that the Left called for: “more troops”.

Again, please provide some quotes from John McCain from 2006-2007 where he asked for anything more than “more troops”.

SEN. CLINTON: — in the spring. We need more troops in Afghanistan. And today Senator Bayh and I have sent a letter to Secretary Gates saying that we need two additional infantry battalions in the south of Afghanistan –

SoulGlo on August 28, 2008 at 8:31 AM

At that time given the surge the reality is two batts were likely:

a) all that was needed

b) all that could be spared given the optempo for the surge….lots of units just getting home were just starting their reset

I’m the only one around here who holds both candidates accountable for unacceptable verbal fu*k ups.
Dave Rywall on August 28, 2008 at 8:20 AM

You’re not so special as to be the only one. Gaffes are gaffes, and there’s nothing wrong with making fun of them. Very few are going to claim that this gaffe makes Biden unfit for office. We’ll make fun of it for a day and move on.

Biggest laugher from Biden: “In recent days, we’ve once again seen the consequences of this neglect with Russia’s challenge to the free and democratic country of Georgia. Barack Obama and I will end this neglect. We will hold Russia accountable for its actions, and we’ll help the people of Georgia rebuild.”

“We need to pull out of Iraq as soon as possible, leaving just a few squadrons of tanks to maintain a small military presence.”

– Joe Biden

fossten on August 28, 2008 at 8:09 AM

It’s hard to defend the Gaffmeister but on this one he deserves a pass. Battalion sized armored cavalry units are referred to as squadrons, (a throwback to honor army traditions from the 19th and early 20th centuries).

It’s hard to defend the Gaffmeister but on this one he deserves a pass. Battalion sized armored cavalry units are referred to as squadrons, (a throwback to honor army traditions from the 19th and early 20th centuries).

sdd on August 28, 2008 at 8:41 AM

True, BUT I think the mockery stems from the fact that the tanks are not the most effective weapon in a CoIn conflict and require massive infantry support in an urban warfare environment.

The crisis we face as a nation is that exerting our will in low-intensity conflict means the use of light infantry or dismounted Mech Inf. This invariably leads to higher casualties than a full blown fight ala GW1. The “Mother Sheehans” and press undermine our national will over a casualty level we faced on single days in WW2.

ergo can we support the needed ops to win Low Intensity Conflicts unless there is a donk in the Oval Office?

“Yesterday, Dec. 7, 1941 Sep. 11, 2001 – a date which will live in infamy – the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan. Al Qaeda.

The United States was at peace with that nation organization of community activists and cultural diplomats and, at the solicitation of Japan, was still in conversation with the government and its emperor looking toward the maintenance of peace in the Pacific.”

I was impressed how Biden ended his speech saying “God protect our troops” because if he and Obama had had their way God would have been all the soldiers had since they voted against the funding of the soldiers. I wonder how his son would feel going to Iraq if his daddy would have had his way and cut off all funding.
How well does “Beau” use a slingshot?

True, BUT I think the mockery stems from the fact that the tanks are not the most effective weapon in a CoIn conflict and require massive infantry support in an urban warfare environment.

The crisis we face as a nation is that exerting our will in low-intensity conflict means the use of light infantry or dismounted Mech Inf. This invariably leads to higher casualties than a full blown fight ala GW1. The “Mother Sheehans” and press undermine our national will over a casualty level we faced on single days in WW2.

ergo can we support the needed ops to win Low Intensity Conflicts unless there is a donk in the Oval Office?

The fourth estate is a fifth column.

sven10077 on August 28, 2008 at 8:44 AM

You’ll get no argument from me on what you have said.

Broadly speaking, I don’t believe this current generation has the stomach for a protracted war. The hard core anti-war groups like Code Pink, (who oppose any military action initiated by a Republican president but were no where to be found when Clinton was bombing the Balkans or abandoning US troops in Somalia) along with their fellow travelers, (the MSM) make that impossible through their manipulation of public opinion.

If Obama were female he would be a card carrying member of Code Pink decked out in full regalia. Biden would be wearing a pair of pink boxers.

Joe Biden was the dunce, is the dunce, will always be the dunce in the classroom or the world stage.

His surname as a verb:

To continue in a state, condition or place.
To wait awhile.
To tolerate.

Bide, bode
abide, Anglican
biden, Teuton

Etymology: Middle English, from Old English bīdan; akin to Old High German bītan to wait, Latin fidere to trust, Greek peithesthai to believe
Date: before 12th century

Merriam-Webster

I’m always curious about origination, and wondering where the name “Biden” traced from Ireland as Gaelic? It’s an English/German surname. But then, St.Patrick was English, escaped from slavery in Ireland, returned as a “Christian” missionary. I’m not putting down St. Patrick. But the Celts had Christian monasteries before the Roman Catholics overtook the Emerald Isle.

Back to Biden the politician, he’s not true to his name unless the “faithful” no longer applies to being Catholic, but to being a Marxist DNC puppet.

Biggest laugher from Biden: “In recent days, we’ve once again seen the consequences of this neglect with Russia’s challenge to the free and democratic country of Georgia. Barack Obama and I will end this neglect. We will hold Russia accountable for its actions, and we’ll help the people of Georgia rebuild.”

If only the surge didn’t happen, then Iraq could’ve been divided up into three pieces as Joe Biden had offered. Baathists would have a country and Jihadists would go home, and peace would have blossomed all over Mesopotamia. ;)

This reminds me of the book “AWOL: The Unexcused Absence of America’s Upper Classes from Military Service — and How It Hurts Our Country” by Kathy Roth-Douquet, Frank Schaeffer. Give it another generation, with fewer and fewer veterans around to remind our citizens of the need for, sacrifices of, and mindset of those serving in the profession of arms. How many younger adults know the difference between a first sergeant and a lieutenant? It’s not hard to neglect a military whose heritage and relevance are forgotten by the citizens for whom it serves.
I’m frankly tired of these folks saying they “Support the Troops.” If they did, maybe they’d do some of these things. But I know they won’t.
“In times of war, and not before,
God and the soldier men adore;
When the war is o’er and all things righted,
The Lord’s forgot and the soldier slighted.”

Battalions, brigades…no biggie, really. [Can’t expect most members of Congress to understand the finer points of military “jargon.”]

The real problem, is that tactics are being discussed openly in Congress, and decisions on tactics are being set in stone by Congress, and Congress is not (according to the Constitution) in the business of conducting war.

Fighting a war, any war, through polls, through Congress, is contrary to what was designed in our Constitution. Warfare is an Executive decision. If Congress doesn’t “like” a particular war…then cut off ALL funding. That is their job.

In the meantime, having a Biden, or an Obama, or a Pelosi or Reid or Kerry, or any member of Congress establishing tactical decisions does only one thing…it enables an enemy, it loses wars. Congress as Fifth Column.